Valdes Ruiz v. Barr

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-60444
Summary Calendar

Yerandy Valdes Ruiz,

Petitioner,

versus

William P. Barr, U. S. Attorney General,

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A215 586 786

Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit
Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Yerandy Valdes Ruiz, a native and citizen of Cuba, petitions for review
of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his
appeal from the order of the immigration judge denying his application for
asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against

*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should
not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in
5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
August 31, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-60444 Document: 00515546808 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/31/2020

No. 19-60444
2
Torture (CAT). The BIA determined that the immigration judge’s adverse
credibility ruling was not clearly erroneous, given the inconsistencies in the
record concerning, inter alia, the following: the injuries that Valdes Ruiz
sustained when detained by Cuban police in June 2016, the extent to which
the police burned off Valdes Ruiz’s anti-regime tattoo, the fact that, prior to
his testimony, Valdes Ruiz failed to mention that his girlfriend had been
detained in Cuba, and the multiple non-responsive answers Valdes Ruiz
provided to questions posed during his hearing, particularly regarding when
certain events occurred .
We review for substantial evidence the findings that Valdes Ruiz is not
credible, see Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536-40 (5th Cir. 2009), and that
he is not eligible for asylum or CAT relief, see Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d
339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Under this standard, we may not reverse a factual
finding unless the evidence compels it. Wang, 569 F.3d at 536-37.
Additionally, we will not uphold an adverse credibility determination if it is
unsupported by the record and based on pure speculation or conjecture. Id.
at 537. Because Valdes Ruiz has failed to brief any argument regarding the
denial of his claim for withholding of removal, that claim is abandoned. See
Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003).
Valdes Ruiz must demonstrate that the evidence compels a contrary
conclusion, but he has not done so. See Wang, 569 F.3d at 537. The adverse
credibility ruling was not based on pure speculation or conjecture. See id.
Instead, it was supported by the record and based on specific inconsistencies
in statements made by Valdes Ruiz during his credible fear interview, in his
asylum application and supporting documents, and at an immigration
hearing. See id. His alternative explanations for some of the inconsistencies
do not show that, under the totality of the circumstances, no reasonable
factfinder could have found him incredible. See id. at 537-38. Additionally,
Valdes Ruiz fails to point to evidence in the administrative record supporting
Case: 19-60444 Document: 00515546808 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/31/2020

No. 19-60444
3
his claims for asylum and CAT relief, other than his tattoo, his father’s
persecution by Cuban officials, and general statements in certain documents
concerning political-based persecution in Cuba. Therefore, given the adverse
credibility determination and Valdes Ruiz’s lack of evidence, the BIA’s
decision is supported by substantial evidence. See Dayo v. Holder, 687 F.3d
653, 657-59 (5th Cir. 2012). Finally, Valdes Ruiz is not entitled to CAT relief
because he has not shown that it is “more likely than not that he [. . .] would
be tortured if removed” to Cuba. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2).
Accordingly, Valdes Ruiz’s petition for review is DENIED.
Case: 19-60444 Document: 00515546808 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/31/2020